Bring back the papal tiara?

[zagjames]

The Church IS a monarchy, NOT a democracy,
and the pope of Rome IS the VICAR of Christ.
The Tiara isn’t something that should be worn
every day, for pete sake, but it should be used
on special and solemn occasions.

Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

The Church is a monarchy, but the Pope aint the monarch. Christ is the king, the Pope is his Prime Minister. The Pope carries out Christ’s agenda. It all goes back to the Old testament where there were the Davidic Kings and the King gave the keys of the Kingdom to his Prime Minister.

I do think the tiara should be used once or twice in the reign of a pope, but it should not be a common thing.

 

[Windmill]

The Church is a monarchy, but the Pope aint the monarch.

I would ask for a reference here. Even wikipedia acknowledges the fact that the Pope is an absolute monarch of the Vatican. His monarchy is temporal, not spiritual.

In addition to his ecclesiastical role as Supreme Pontiff of all Christians worldwide in communion with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope is ex officio the absolute monarch of Vatican City, the last truly sovereign Prince of the Church.

 

[zagjames]

I was talking about the spiritual, which is the more important part.

 

[Windmill]

and the tiara is a symbol of that temporal monarchy, along with his spiritual and authority over secular monarchsmoral.

 

[Freshman88]

I think it’s actually a form of pride that leads one to reject pomp and ritual and formal stuff altogether. “We think we’re above all that”.

It’s as common as the boy (or nowadays the man) who doesn’t want to “dress up” for Church on Sundays. And it runs deep in the U.S. We’ve been brought up to hate anything that smacks of royalty. - Ah the U.S., the most humble nation on earth .

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

Amen.

It was a humiliating experience to accept the “pomp” traditions of Eastern Catholics. The “pomp” of the Divine Liturgy reminded me of the Glory and Supremacy of God - it was the first time in my life that I recognized a higher power.

and to go further with your point - everyone in that Church was wearing a suit, or at least a tie, it was very different experience - an experience I would credit to the surroundings. My home parish is more like a wearhouse so it’s no wonder everyone dresses in the same clothes that they would wear to costco - while that Eastern Church with its ornate iconostasis and breathtaking icons was truly a house of God.

Just something to think about.

 

[Freshman88]

The tiera is a symbol of those barberous times that we don’t need reminding of other than to remember what was learned.
.

Barbarous times?

Whenever my faith is hurting, I look to the Crusades - their example of faith inspires me.

How can you slander those brave Christian souls who gave their lives for the defense of Christendom?

 

[Lepanto]

St. Francis sold all of his worldly possessions to rebuild San Damiano Church (and two others as well).

 

[Ad_Deum]

I think it’ll be nice to see the pope to wear the tiara again especially if he is going to celebrate the traditional latin mass anytime sooner. in the other hand, if he is going to celebrate the new order of mass then the tiara is not a fitting garment for him to wear just his regular miter.

pax

 

[Joab_Anias]

Was it not God who ordered the Temple and Tabernacle to be made out of expensive materials, with it’s priests dressed in ornate vestments? Apparently, Christ wanted the “pomp.”

I am all for it if it honors God. Who would see the tiara as honoring God though? Sure all of us Catholics would. But who would it scandalize and for what reasons? These are things we need to be concerned about for Christs sake.

 

[Joab_Anias]

I don’t see the logic here. The pope is not self-asserting his authority, he is merely acknowledging the authority God gave him. Is the answer to our problems for the Pope to back off and not lead? Are our problems due to kings wearing crowns and royal garb, or is it abuse of power? I don’t see how symbols necessarily corrupt. And why is the tiara a symbol of barbarous times? It has no more affiliation with barbarism than a knight’s suit of armor.

You and I know that my brother but there are those who do not see it that way. Its for their sake and the mission of leading them to Christ that the current tact is best. Its in the Spirit of Vatican II and not going to reverse. It was never my choice for the Papacy to devolvle but since it has chosen to do so I will always side with its decisions. I hardly see the Pope backing off without his tiera on. In fact I see the opposite. JPII was the most traveled Pontiff in history and most likely one of the most ecumenical. If you think that Benedict is backing off you should read his books.

Some would say that, in many countries, there is a de facto schism. I think that the hierarchy needs to be reunified under the leadership of a strong Pope who isn’t afraid to call the shots as he sees them and not fear being labelled “oppressive” when, in fact, he is carrying out his duties.

Ah, I see. No easy answer to that one. I know as a child I was pushed away by authoritarianism that took me 2+ decades to sort out. Its much easier to trust the Church now.

I don’t follow here. Are you saying that the Vatican is imposing vanity by requiring the clerics to wear clerical garb, or are you saying that it is virtuous for priests to shun clerical garb?

The vatican doesn’t impose. The faithful do.We give and donate. Many monasteries of the middle ages were corrupted by gifts they could not refuse. There are many orders that take strict vows of poverty. As I have said before, if it glorifies God I am all for it. If it glorifies only a man or makes it hard for him to handle power then I am not.

Who is worshipping a man?

You and I know we are not but who do we scandalize by a pompus appearance? Should we care?

I find the opposite to be true. Pomp and ceremony tend to actualize the grand awe that should be present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and be decorating those ministers divinely ordained to offer that sacrifice. When the visible mirrors the invisible, that tends to have a very powerful evangelizing effect. I know many who have converted because they actually felt they were worshipping God more fully in a decorated Catholic church than in a start, protestant meeting house.

I would agree. Evidently the Pontiff doesn’t feel the tiera is necessary to do this so why should we? I respect his wisdom on the issue and don’t try to second guess him by saying I think he should bring it back.

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

I could find more if I had time, but this gets the basic idea across. When the idea is to glorify God, St. Francis demanded only the finest.

So whats the point. The tiera glorifies God. Sure you and I can see that but how many wont and see it as us glorifying the Pope?

Though the argument would be invalid it never the less is an opening for blasphemy against the Church and a polemic road block to evangelization that we’re better off without. How many times have you heard the complaint that the Church seems too much about money even from her own members. How approachable do you think Jesus would have been had he been rich?

 

[Joab_Anias]

BENEFICIAL (overall):
The inquisition kept the faith pure and safe from Albigensianism, Waldensianism, and other heresies. Also kept Protestantism out of certain places, such as Spain, Italy, and Portugal. Likewise, the crusades were just and defensive wars which repelled the Muslim invaders out of Europe and temporarily (unfortunately) out of the Holy Land.

On the other hand, nothing beneficial came out of schisms and very little good came out of the reformation.

Big differences!

I understand that God can bring good from all things. I just happen to think he will bring much more good from humility than pomp.

 

[Joab_Anias]

Barbarous times?

Whenever my faith is hurting, I look to the Crusades - their example of faith inspires me.

How can you slander those brave Christian souls who gave their lives for the defense of Christendom?

Maybe you forget JPII apologized for them.

 

[SemperFidelis]

Its in the Spirit of Vatican II and not going to reverse.

“If you ever meet up with the ‘Spirit of Vatican II’, do us all a favor and drive a wooden stake through its heart.”

• Fr. Benedict Groeschel

 

[RomanCrusader]

I would like to see it be brought back, but if it doesn’t come back I’m over it.

 

[SemperFidelis]

Maybe you forget JPII apologized for them.

That’s his own opinion, not a Magisterial anouncement, so that doesn’t we have to apologize to people for them. I have heard of far more Popes who never apologized for them. No real reason to anyway.

 

[RomanCrusader]

Maybe you forget JPII apologized for them.

The crusades were a holy and noble endeavor. Deus Vult!

 

[ASimpleSinner]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Because that is as cool as can be.

As long as I have been alive to remember (which is less time than since the last pope wore a tiara) jokes about the “pope’s funny hat” have been in circulation.

Way I see it, if they are going to make much of papal headgear anyway, bring back the tiara!

 

[Lepanto]

Maybe you forget JPII apologized for them.

Are you sure that he didn’t apologize for any atrocities and not the crusades themselves? Please cite the source for your claim.

 

[mystified]

As Pope, he has chosen to not use the tiara. As Pope, he can pretty much do as he pleases as long as what he pleases does not include sin.
Pope John Paul the Great was a man of many hats. He was not above donning an assortment of headgear on his travels. I particularly recall a picture of him in a mariachi sombrero when he was in México. Was he less the Pope at that moment? No. Was he enjoying being a human being at that moment? His face said yes.